Biotechnology & Pharmaceutical
Life-improving innovations in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals require intellectual property counsel with unique technical and legal expertise to protect the assets upon which companies are established and flourish. The Biopharma Group at Brinks includes attorneys and patent agents who counsel a diverse array of clients — from start-ups to prestigious academic institutions to global corporations — on the ever-evolving laws concerning intellectual property in the United States and worldwide. The fast pace of new discoveries and their commercial applications requires a law firm like Brinks that has a comprehensive grasp of the legal issues and the experience and industry expertise to understand the scientific and strategic implications of the discoveries.
Areas of Expertise
Innovation in life sciences comes only after expensive investments. The stakes are high. Investments must be protectedâ€”as aggressively as appropriate.
The Biopharma Group at Brinks is deeply versed in Biopharma technology and the applicable law. Our attorneys have significant litigation expertise in this area, including Hatch-Waxman litigation involving generic/brand pharmaceuticals.
We litigate Biopharma cases in a clear and compelling manner. Our attorneys have prevailed in high-profile cases in the courts, including appeals at the Federal Circuit. Please contact us for examples.
We also understand that any litigation should align with your business objectives and strategy, including the budget. We will implement those objectives and strategy during the litigation, while meeting the budget.
Put simply, no other firm presents the breadth and depth of scientific and legal expertise that the Biopharma Group at Brinks brings to the table.
A representative list of compounds that we have worked on is provided below.
|Generic Product||Branded Product|
|Choline fenofibric acid||TriLipix®|
The Biopharma Group’s skilled litigators represent major biotechnology and pharmaceutical clients in the courts, including:
Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Laboratories
(D.N.J. 2011).Â The firm represents the Watson defendants in litigating patents under the Hatch-Waxman Act relating to methylphenidate transdermal patches sold by Noven as DaytranaÂ®.
Abbott Laboratories and Fournier Laboratories Ireland Ltd. v. Watson Laboratories
(D.N.J. 2010). The firm represents the Watson defendants in litigating patents under the Hatch-Waxman Act related to choline fenofibrate sold by Abbott as TrilipixÂ®.
Aventis Pharma S.A. v. Sandoz Inc.
(C.D. Cal. 2006), aff â€™d, Nos. 2008-1560, -1563, -1591 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Successfully represented Sandoz Inc. in a patent infringement suit initiated under the Hatch-Waxman Act.Â Litigation involved a generic form of enoxaparin.
Abbott Labs v. Sandoz Inc.
486 F.Â Supp.Â 2d 767 (N.D. Ill. 2007).Â Successfully defended Sandoz Inc. against request for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction by Abbott and Astellas before Judge Wayne R. Andersen concerning patents relating to a polymorph of crystalline cefdinir, an antibiotic also sold as OmnicefÂ®.
Abraxis Bioscience Inc. v. Navinta LLC
625 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2010), rehâ€™g denied (Mar. 14, 2011).Â Successfully represented appellant in an appeal from a judgment of infringement of three patents related to ropivacaine hydrochloride monohydrate sold by Abraxis and APP Pharmaceuticals as NaropinÂ®. The Federal Circuit held that Abraxis did not have standing to bring suit and remanded with instructions to dismiss.
Boss v. Cabilly
(Fed. Cir. 2010) (Interference No. 105,531). Successfully represented client in an appeal of the decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that Genentechâ€™s â€śCabillyâ€ť patent application (No.Â 08/422,187) has priority over UCB Pharmaâ€™s â€śBossâ€ť patent application (No.Â 08/450,727) covering recombinant DNA techniques for manufacturing antibodies.Â The technology is now a foundation for many top-selling cancer-treatment drugs, such as AvastinÂ®, HerceptinÂ® and RituxanÂ®.
Abbott Labs v. Sandoz Inc.
566 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (en banc in part), cert. denied, No. 09-335 (2010). Successfully represented Sandoz Inc. in an appeal before the Federal Circuit dealing with claim construction and the proper interpretation of product-by-process claims.Â In a landmark decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district courtâ€™s claim construction, and the en banc Court resolved the long-standing conflict on the interpretation of product-by-process claims between its prior decisions in Atlantic Thermoplastics and Scripps Clinic.Â Following Supreme Court precedent, the Court upheld the rule in Atlantic Thermoplastics that product-by-process claims are limited by their process steps.
Chiron Corporation v. Genentech, Inc.
363 F.3d 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2004) cert. denied, 125 S.Ct. 870 (2005).Â The firm represented Genentech at the Federal Circuit in the appeal of a jury verdict that Chironâ€™s asserted patent is invalid and Genentechâ€™s revolutionary breast cancer drug HerceptinÂ® does not infringe.Â The Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision upholding the verdict.
Bio-Technology General Corp. v. Genentech, Inc.
267 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2001).Â Brinks represented Genentech before the Federal Circuit and successfully obtained reversal of a finding of patent invalidity as well as a remand of Genentechâ€™s patent infringement counterclaim.
Oxford Gene Technology Ltd v. Motorola, Inc.
(N.D. Ill.Â 2001-2002).Â A team of Brinks attorneys defended Motorola in a suit brought by Oxford Gene Technology alleging infringement of patents directed to DNA micoarrays.
From proteomics to atomic force microscopy, innovations in biotech, nanotech and pharmaceuticals have amplified the need for intellectual property counsel who understand not only what drives the science of your business, but also what drives its success. In today’s high-tech world, strong intellectual property rights are essential to success. The diverse array of talents possessed by attorneys at Brinks enable our attorneys to counsel clients as varied as small start-ups, prestigious academic institutions, and global corporations on the ever-evolving body of law promoting and protecting innovation in the U.S. and throughout the world.
The Biopharma Group evaluates patents for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as for venture capitalists. These projects range from evaluating a single competitor’s patent to evaluating large portfolios of acquisition or investment targets, together with freedom to operate studies.
While details of patent evaluations are confidential, Biopharma Group attorneys have opined on patents for large and small pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as venture capitalists.
Licenses and Other Agreements
The Biopharma Group negotiates and drafts agreements for BioPharma clients, ranging from licensing a single patent to the formation of complex joint ventures. Technologies at issue have ranged from discovery platforms, to new chemical entities, and to diagnostic applications.
We have helped bring technology and business together by crafting licenses and other agreements in fields from drug discovery to carbon nanotubes.
Before coming to Brinks, many of our attorneys and agents obtained advanced degrees in fields such as organic chemistry, biophysics, molecular biology, genetics , and pharmacology. Coupled with this world-class foundation in science, Brinks attorneys have world-class expertise in every area of IP law and practice. Brinks attorneys and agents have drafted and prosecuted patent applications regarding BioPharma inventions in the U.S. and internationally.
Post-grant Proceedings at the USPTO and Internationally
The Biopharma Group has significant experience in USPTO proceedings concerning BioPharma patents. We are especially experienced in post-grant proceedings at the USPTO, such as Inter Partes Review (IPR) of an issued patent. We work hard to protect our clients' patents from challenges initiated by third parties, and we aggressively challenge patents held by our clientsâ€™ competitors where appropriate.
Triazolyl Phenyl Benzenesulfonamides
Controlled release interferon drug products and treatment of HCV infections using same
Heteroarylsulfonamides and CCR2
Cycloalkyl-hydroxyl compounds and compositions for cholesterol management
Process for preparing fluoromethyl- substituted heterocyclic compounds
Methods for Selective N-9 Glycosylation of Purines
Tetracycline-regulated adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors for gene delivery to the nervous system
Amino Sugar Chelates
Ketone Compounds and Compositions for Cholesterol Management and Related Uses
Triazolyl Pyridyl Benzenesulfonamides
Inhibitors of Human Tumor-Expressed CCXCKR2
Secreted and Transmembrane Polypeptides and Nucleic Acids Encoding the Same
Nucleic Acids Encoding Secreted Polypeptides That Stimulate Release of Proteoglycans from Cartilage
Dipeptide Calpain Inhibitors
Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer and Methods Using the Same
Synthetic Oligosaccharides for Moracella Vaccine
Expression of a protein in myocardium by injection of a gene
7-amino-1-cyclopropyl-4-oxo-1, 4-dihydro-quinoline and napthyridine-3-carboxylic acids and antibacterial agents containing these compounds